پیوندهای مفید
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 25 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 560 |
| تعداد مقالات | 4,440 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 7,393,258 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 3,853,595 |
معلمِ فرهنگ‌آگاه ضرورت‌ها، الزامات و پیامدهای تدریسِ زمینه‌محور در جامعه چندفرهنگی | ||
| تجارب معلمی | ||
| سخن سردبیر، دوره 4، شماره 2، شهریور 1405، صفحه 1-8 اصل مقاله (374.94 K) | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.48310/jte.2026.24788.1302 | ||
| نویسنده | ||
| رشید احمدی فر* | ||
| دانشیار جامعه شناسی و عضو گروه علوم تربیتی،دانشگاه فرهنگیان،تهران، ایران. | ||
| چکیده | ||
| کلاس درس امروز هم‌زمان زیر تأثیر دو دگرگونی است: گسترش فضای مجازی، آموزش دیجیتال و هوش مصنوعی از یک سو، و تنوع زبانی و فرهنگی دانش‌آموزان از سوی دیگر. این سخن سردبیر با رویکردی مفهومی-تحلیلی می‌پرسد معلم نسل جدید برای تدریس در چنین وضعی به چه آگاهی‌ها و شایستگی‌هایی نیاز دارد. روش پژوهش، مرور تفسیریِ هدفمندِ ادبیات بنیادین تدریس فرهنگ‌پاسخگو و فرهنگ‌پایدارساز، دانش‌های اندوخته خانواده‌ها، آموزش دوزبانه و نقد فناوری‌های آموزشی است که با تحلیل مضمونیِ مفهومی بررسی شد. تحلیل پنج بُعد به‌هم‌پیوسته را نشان داد: خودآگاهی فرهنگی معلم، حساسیت زبانی، برنامه درسی زمینه‌محور، سواد انتقادی دیجیتال و ارزشیابی عادلانه؛ هر بُعد الزاماتی مشخص برای معلم و نهادهای آموزشی دارد و پیامدهای آن برای یادگیری، همبستگی اجتماعی و سیاست‌گذاری نیز بحث شده است. تدریس فرهنگ‌آگاه، به‌ویژه در دورانی که ماشین‌ها نیز در تولید و توزیع دانش شریک شده‌اند، شایستگی بنیادینِ معلم است، نه مهارتی جانبی. تحلیل نشان داد این شایستگی از خودآگاهیِ معلم آغاز می‌شود و در زبان، برنامه درسی، فناوری و ارزشیابی تجسم می‌یابد. برخلاف تصور رایج، فرهنگ‌آگاهی مسئله «مناطق دوزبانه» نیست؛ هر معلمی در هر کلاسی با دانش‌آموزانی روبه‌روست که زیست‌جهانشان با «دانش‌آموز پیش‌فرض» فاصله دارد.نتیجه آنکه تدریس فرهنگ‌آگاه افزوده تزئینی نیست، بلکه شرط عدالت آموزشی است و تحقق آن به بازطراحی تربیت معلم، متون درسی و سیاست‌گذاری نیاز دارد. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| تدریس فرهنگ‌آگاه؛ آموزش چندفرهنگی؛ تربیت معلم؛ هوش مصنوعی در آموزش؛ تدریس زمینه‌محور | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| The Culture-Aware Teacher Necessities, Requirements, and Implications of Context-Based Teaching in a Multicultural Society | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| rashid Ahmadifar | ||
| Associate Professor of Sociology, Department of Educational Sciences, Farhangian University, Tehran, Iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Contemporary classrooms are shaped by two forces at once. On the one hand, social media, digital education, and generative artificial intelligence (AI) are redefining what it means to be literate, so that literacy can no longer be reduced to decoding printed text. On the other hand, students enter schools carrying diverse languages, dialects, historical memories and lived experiences. A teacher who attends to only one of these realities misses half the classroom. Much of teacher education and textbook production nonetheless still relies on an implicit "default student": a child who brings the standard language from home, recognises the names, examples and images of the textbook, and experiences little cultural distance from the school. The further a child stands from this model, the greater the hidden cost of learning, a cost that Bourdieu and Passeron explained through cultural capital and the cultural arbitrariness of school knowledge. Purpose. Writing from an editorial and sociological standpoint, this article examines why teachers of the new generation must be culture-aware, what requirements follow from this awareness at the levels of the teacher, the curriculum, technology and assessment, and what implications it carries for learning, social cohesion and policy. It speaks to school teachers, student teachers, education researchers and policy-makers in Iran, a society that is multilingual and multicultural, while remaining relevant to comparable contexts. Its contribution lies in connecting the traditions of culturally responsive and culturally sustaining pedagogy with questions of digital literacy and AI. Method. The study is a conceptual-analytical and interpretive article; no new field data were collected. Sources were purposively selected from four theoretical clusters: (a) culturally relevant, responsive and sustaining pedagogy; (b) the sociological critique of school culture together with the funds-of-knowledge approach; (c) bilingual education and translanguaging; and (d) critical studies of AI and educational technology. Selection criteria were the conceptual centrality of a work, publication in a reputable scholarly journal or press, and relevance to teaching in multilingual settings. The author's earlier study on culture-aware mathematics education (Ahmadifar, 2026) served as an analytical illustration. Analysis proceeded through close reading and extraction of conceptual units, constant comparison across theoretical traditions, and clustering of units into dimensions with the greatest explanatory power for teachers' work. The approach is not a systematic review, and its limitations are acknowledged below. Findings. The analysis identified three arguments for the necessity of culture-aware teaching (learning, technology and social life) and five interrelated dimensions, each carrying specific requirements. First, teachers' own sociocultural self-awareness requires reflective components and practicum experiences in diverse settings within teacher education. Second, linguistic sensitivity requires teachers to treat the home language as a bridge to learning and to connect school terminology with children's everyday language. Third, a context-based curriculum requires that examples, names, narratives and problems be drawn from students' lives, while avoiding the folklorisation of culture. Fourth, critical digital literacy requires teachers to examine AI outputs for linguistic and cultural bias and to design activities in which students test machine answers against local knowledge; the article proposes adding a cultural dimension to technological pedagogical content knowledge. Fifth, fair assessment requires linguistic review of test items and diversity in assessment formats, because an instrument whose linguistic load exceeds its conceptual load measures language rather than knowledge. Implications. At the level of learning, congruence between classroom language and children's life-worlds is expected to deepen conceptual understanding and reduce alienation from school, although local empirical evidence remains limited. At the social level, mutual recognition provides a basis for civic cohesion that does not depend on homogenisation. At the policy level, the approach points to changes in teacher-education curricula, textbook approval procedures and school-level guidance on the use of AI. Two risks must be managed: cultural stereotyping, and the imposition of additional burdens on teachers who already work with scarce resources. Every requirement should therefore be accompanied by institutional support. Conclusion. Culture-aware teaching is a foundational teacher competence rather than a peripheral skill, particularly at a time when machines participate in the production and circulation of knowledge. It is not a concern limited to bilingual regions: every teacher faces students whose life-worlds differ from the imagined default student. Three practical steps are proposed: a culture-awareness module and reflective practicum in teacher education, culturally and linguistically informed review of textbooks with the participation of teachers and students, and a critical AI-literacy guide for teachers. Future research should include action research in Iranian classrooms to test the five dimensions, empirical audits of AI bias in Persian and regional languages, and studies of teachers' experiences in implementing these requirements. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Culture-Aware Teaching؛ Multicultural Education؛ Context-Based Pedagogy, Artificial Intelligence in Education | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Ahmadifar, R. (2026). In which language does mathematics speak? Requirements of culture-aware mathematics education for future teachers.Under publication. [Persian].
Banks, J. A. (2019). An introduction to multicultural education (6th ed.). Pearson.
Bender, E. M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A., & Shmitchell, S. (2021). On the dangers of stochastic parrots: Can language models be too big? In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 610–623). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3442188.3445922
Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J.-C. (1990). Reproduction in education, society and culture (2nd ed.; R. Nice, Trans.). Sage.
Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran. (1979, as amended 1989). Article 15.
Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781853596773
D'Ambrosio, U. (1985). Ethnomathematics and its place in the history and pedagogy of mathematics. For the Learning of Mathematics, 5(1), 44–48.
García, O., & Li, W. (2014). Translanguaging: Language, bilingualism and education. Palgrave Macmillan.
Gay, G. (2018). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice (3rd ed.). Teachers College Press.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465–491. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312032003465
Miao, F., & Holmes, W. (2023). Guidance for generative AI in education and research. UNESCO.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
Moll, L. C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory Into Practice, 31(2), 132–141.
New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 60–93. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.66.1.17370n67v22j160u
Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism. NYU Press.
Paris, D. (2012). Culturally sustaining pedagogy: A needed change in stance, terminology, and practice. Educational Researcher, 41(3), 93–97. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12441244
Villegas, A. M., & Lucas, T. (2002). Educating culturally responsive teachers: A coherent approach. State University of New York Press. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 1 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 1 |
||